General Steel Castings Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 24, 1943

52 N.L.R.B. 143 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of GENERAL STEEL CASTINGS CORPORATION, ARMOR PLANT
and PATTERNMAKERS LEAGUE OF NORTH AMERICA, ST. Louis ASSOCIA-
TION, AFL.
Case `No. R-5752. -Decided August 04, 1943
Mr. Wesley Lueders, of Granite City, Ill., and Mr. J. L. Campbell,
of University City, Mo., for the Company.
Mr. Roy E. Rogers, of Hammond, Ind., and Mr. R. J. Cardwell,
of St. Louis, Mo., for the Patternmakers.
Mr. Walter S. Love, of Granite City, Ill., for the CIO.
Mr. William C. Raisinger, Jr., of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Patternmakers League of North Amer-
ica, St. Louis Association, AFL, herein called the Patternmakers, al-
leging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the
representation of employees at the Madison, Illinois, plant of General
,Steel Castings Corporation, Eddystone, Pennsylvania, herein called the
Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an ap-
propriate hearing upon due notice before Ruth C. Hutchinson, Trial
Examiner. Said hearing was held at St. Louis, Missouri, on July 27,
1943. The Company, the Patternmakers, and United Steelworkers of
America, CIO, herein called the CIO, appeared; participated, and were
afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine
witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial
Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial
error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity
to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
General Steel Castings Corporation, a Delaware corporation, main-
tains its principal offices and• operates one manufacturing plant at
52 N. L. R. B., No. 23.
143
144 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELA'MONS BOARD
Eddystone, Pennsylvania. It also operates two other plants, one,
known as the Commonwealth plant, located in Granite City, Illinois,
and the other, known as the Armor plant, located in Madison, Illinois.
This proceeding concerns only employees of the Armor plant which is
owned by the Defense Plant Corporation. At this plant the Com-
pany is engaged in the manufacture of cast armor for the United
States Ordnance Department. Since March 1943, at which time the
Armor plant first began operating, the Company has purchased raw
materials, consisting of pig iron, scrap iron, lime rock, iron ore, and
molding sand, valued in excess of $200,000, of which approximately
50 percent was shipped to the plant from points outside the State of
Illinois. During the same period, the value of finished products manu-
factured at the Armor plant exceeded $300,000, of which approxi-
mately 50 percent was shipped to points outside the State of Illinois.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of the National Labor Relations Act at its Armor plant. '
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Patternmakers-League of North America, St. Louis Association, is a
labor organization, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
admitting to membership employees of the Company.
United Steelworkers of America is a labor organization, affiliated
with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to member-
ship employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The parties stipulated that on or about April 29,1943, the Pattern-
makers requested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive bargain-
ing representative of the employees in an alleged appropriate bargain-
ing unit, and that the Company refuses to accord the Patternmakers
such recognition because it contends that the bargaining unit sought
by the Patternmakers is inappropriate.
A statement of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence at the
hearing, indicates that the Patternmakers and the CIO each rep-
resents a substantial number of employees in the alleged appropriate
unit?
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
I The report of the Regional Director states that the Patternmakers submitted 16 undated
designation cards bearing apparently genuine signatures of persons whose names appear on
the Company's pay roll of May 22, 1943, which contains the names of 22 persons within
the alleged appropriate unit. The report further states that the CIO submitted 13 designa-
tion cards bearing apparently genuine signatures of persons whose names appear on the
afoiesaid pay roll of the Company and that 12 of the said cards bear dates between'March
1 and 26, 1943, while the remaining card is undated.
GENERAL STEEL CASTINGS CORPORATION 145
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT; THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Patternmakers contends that all employees of the Company's
Armor plant who work on the production, maintenance, and repair
of patterns, excluding the foreman of the pattern shop, comprise an
appropriate bargaining unit. The Company and the CIO, on the
other hand, contend that the employees whom the Patternmakers
seek to represent do not constitute an appropriate bargaining unit
but are properly a part of the production and maintenance unit pres-
ently represented by the CIO.
On April 30, 1943, pursuant to an agreement for consent election
and an amendment 2 thereto, the Board conducted "Globe" type elec-
tions by secret ballot among certain groups of the Company's Armor
plant employees to determine their choice of bargaining representa-
tives.
The entire Armor plant, which includes the equivalent of several
adjoining buildings or wings, is housed under one roof. The Foundry
Department occupies one of the buildings or wings, and the Pattern
Shop is,located in an offset of the Foundry Department wing. All
the employees in the Pattern Shop are under the direct supervision
of the Pattern Shop foreman, who has the authority to hire and
discharge and is responsible only to the superintendent of the Foundry
Department. The Pattern Shop employs, in addition to the foreman,
2 leadmen, 6 patternmakers,1 patternmaker apprentice, 9 wood handy-
men, 3 wood handymen learners,` 8 to 10 laborers, and, 1 machine man.
Since the aforementioned amendment to the agreement for consent
election did not include the Pattern Shop laborers or the machine man
in the group of Pattern Shop employees to be excluded from the vot-
ing groups, these employees are properly a part of the production
and maintenance unit presently represented by the CIO.
The leadmen are patternmakrs who make templates and frequently
have crews of from three to seven patternmakers, wood handymen,
and wood handymen learners assisting them. The leadmen have no
authority to hire, discharge or discipline employees, or to recommend
such action. Patternmakers, patternmaker apprentices, wood handy-
men, and wood handymen learners all work on the manufacture, main-
2 The Company, the CIO , International Association of Machinists , District No. 9, AFL,
herein called the I A M., and International Brotherhood of Boilermakers , Iron Shipbuilders,
Welders and Helpers of America, AFL, herein called the Boilermakers, were the parties who
executed the agreement for consent election . Subsequent to the execution of said agreement
but prior to the election at the request of the Patternmakers, the pasties executed an amend-
ment to the agreement for consent election in which all patternmakers , patternmaker
apprentices, wood handymen , and wood handymen learners , including lay-out men in the
pattern department , were excluded from the voting groups The results of the consent
election showed that the production and maintenance group had selected the CIO as their
representative ; the craft group of machinists had selected the I . A. M as their representa-
tive ; and the craft group of welders had selected the Boilermakers as their representative.
146 ^ DECTisiONS OF NiATTONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tenance, and repair of patterns. The only differential between them
is one of skill. - The petitioner classifies wood handymen and wood
handymen learners as patternmaker apprentices, inasmuch as they
work on patterns. The Company 'contends that wood-handymen and
wood handymen learners are not and never will be skilled pattern-
makers, because the' repair work available in this pattern shop does
not provide the experience necessary to become a skilled pattern-
maker. However, it is customary for wood handymen learners in
this shop to advance to the classification of wood handymen, and
thence to patternmakers. There is no specified length of time that
an employee must remain in one--classification before being advanced
to the next classification. The Company has no recognized appren-
tice-training plan. The one employee who is now classified as a pat-
ternmaker apprentice was hired after having had 2 years of school
work and 6 months' experience in a job shop as a patternmaker
apprentice.
The Armor plant uses both production patterns, which are mostly
large patterns ranging in size up to 6' x 20',,and shop patterns, which
are small patterns ranging in size from 9" to 4' in length. The
Pattern Shop manufactures no production patterns, but does manu-
facture shop patterns. All production patterns are either manufac-
tured at one of the Company's other plants or are purchased complete.
The Pattern Shop at the Armor plant,is engaged in the manufacture
of shop patterns and in the maintenance and repair of both shop
patterns and production patterns. Less than 10 percent of the work
of the Pattern Shop consists of the manufacture of shop patterns
while the remaining 90 percent of its work consists 'of maintenance
and repair of both shop and production patterns.
In its description of an appropriate bargaining unit, the petitioner
advisedly refrains from naming specific job classifications, because
of the fact that the Company's present job classifications are in con-
flict with the Union's classification for membership. The petitioning
union customarily petitions only for patternmakers and patternmaker
apprentices. At the Armor plant those employees who are classified
by the Company as wood handymen and wood handymen learners
qualify for membership in the Union because they work on patterns
and are considered by the Union to be patternmaker apprentices. It
is customary in the industry, where the Patternmakers League has
employees under contract, as at the Company's Commonwealth Divi-
sion in Granite City, Illinois, for wood handymen and wood handy-
men learners to be ineligible for membership in the Union and there-
fore to be prohibited from working on patterns. The petitioner,
therefore, in the instant case seeks the same type of unit it customarily
seeks, but describes the appropriate unit in different terms from those
S
GENERAL STEEL CASTINGS CORPORATION 147
it customarily uses, in order to cover a peculiar situation which exists
in this particular pattern shop.
On the other hand, the Company claims that this pattern shop is
different from other pattern shops in that its work consists mostly
of repair rather than the manufacture of patterns, and its Pattern
Shop employees are, therefore, much less skilled than those in other
pattern shops. The Company, therefore, contends that the usual
Board rule of appropriateness of a craft unit of patternmakers should
not apply.
We are of the opinion that the Pattern Shop employees sought by
the Patternmakers are a homogeneous and identifiable group engaged
in work which we have frequently found to be sufficiently distin-
guishable from that of other production and maintenance employees
to warrant establishing them as a separate unit if they so desire. We
are also of the opinion that the Pattern Shop employees may properly
be included in the production and maintenance unit presently repre-
sented by the CIO.
We shall make no final determination of the appropriate unit at
this time, but shall direct that a separate election be held among all
employees of the Company at its Armor plant in Madison, Illinois,
who are engaged in the production, maintenance and repair of pat-
terns, excluding the foreman of the Pattern Shop, and all other super-
visory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline
or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively
recommend such action. If these employees select the Patternmak-
ers they will constitute a separate unit; if they select the CIO they
will thereby have indicated their desire to be included in the produc-
tion and maintenance unit presently represented by the CIO, and
will be a part of such unit. We shall, accordingly, direct that the
question concerning the representation which has arisen be resolved by
an election by secret ballot among the aforesaid Pattern Shop em-
ployees who, were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the
limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. The requests of
the Patternmakers and the CIO that their names appear on the ballot
as set forth hereinafter in the Direction of Election are hereby
granted.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National, Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and'Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with General Steel
549875-44-vol. 52-11
148 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Castings Corporation, Eddystone, Pennsylvania, an election by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty
(30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Fourteenth Region, act-
ing in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board,
and subject to Article III; Section 10, of said Rules and Regulations,
among all employees of the Company at its Armor plant in Madison,
Illinois, engaged in the production, maintenance, and repair of pat-
terns, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction, including such employees who
did not work during said pay-roll period because they were, ill or on
vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed
forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the
polls, but excluding the foreman of the Pattern Shop, and all other
supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge,
discipline or otherwise. effect changes in the status of - employees, or
effectively recommend such action, and employees who have since quit
or been discharged for cause, to determine whether they desire to
be represented by Patternmakers League of North America, St. Louis
Association, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, or by
United Steelworkers of America, Local Union No. 2947, CIO, for the
purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.
CHAIRMAN MILLIs took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.